Drakinor Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 Super severs is a code word for server merges. You're not going to get thousands of people on a handful of servers. What you're going to see is about 70 servers just disappear from the server list with your characters assigned to a new "super server". Its a spin tactic meant to distract the media and investors from the fact that this game is merging servers. You can get thousands on a few servers, hell look at EVE, on sever about 80,000 people on at once. It is possible, but can you imagine trying to do anything other than pvp or instanced runs on a server that congested? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spungey Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 Server merges/transfers aren't gonna solve much. Yes it will give people the opportunity to play this game with others but it seems that everyone forgets why it got this bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LilSaihah Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 You can get thousands on a few servers, hell look at EVE, on sever about 80,000 people on at once. It is possible, but can you imagine trying to do anything other than pvp or instanced runs on a server that congested? In other news, leading government scientists have discovered that EVE and SWTOR are completely different games, in both the front and back ends. Back to Steve, with the weather. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leggomy Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 In other news, leading government scientists have discovered that EVE and SWTOR are completely different games, in both the front and back ends. Back to Steve, with the weather. Haha this cracked me up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zootskyqua Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 I can just see the intense lag and whining over congestion, kill stealing, log in wait times, spawn camping, etc.... I'd rather have lower population servers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alkiii Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 The problem is this ... If they expand the cap on servers like "Fatman," these forums are going to light up like the 4th of July with complaints about poor FPS on the Fleet, etc. They have to optimize this game or change their recommended system requirements to play this game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord_Karsk Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 The problem is this ... If they expand the cap on servers like "Fatman," these forums are going to light up like the 4th of July with complaints about poor FPS on the Fleet, etc. They have to optimize this game or change their recommended system requirements to play this game. Dude they will just place a cap on players per instance. Thats all. So there will be 47 fleet instances with around 150-250 on each.Many MMOs do this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drakkip Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 (edited) The hero engine they are running on will probably have a heck of a time running with that many people until they upgrade BOTH the hamsters and the wheels they are running on Edited May 25, 2012 by Drakkip Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MilitiaMasterV Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 I can just see the intense lag and whining over congestion, kill stealing, log in wait times, spawn camping, etc.... I don't know if you've played the Republic side recently, but they went through and 'polished' a lot of those quests that require a certain guy to kill for completion (So instead of him sitting there, you hit some object and he spawns.). I noticed it when I made my new Jedi. Not to say it won't happen still, but they were working on things like that before this uproar apparently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YanksfanJP Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 I can just see the intense lag and whining over congestion, kill stealing, log in wait times, spawn camping, etc.... I'd rather have lower population servers. Spawn camping and kill stealing and congestion are pretty minimal issues on full servers like Fatman, and they were barely issues at all on servers that were heavy and full at launch. You probably didn't know this, but this game has the ability to create instanced versions of planets, Fleet, etc. For example, if the game detects there are more people above a certain threshold that is preprogrammed in on Dromund Kaas, the game automatically creates a second instance of Dromund Kaas. You can't see people in the other instance and they can't see you. Nodes aren't shared, mobs aren't shared, etc. Chat is shared, and you're still on the same server (just a different instance of it). If you group up with someone on a different server, one of you will be given the option to transfer to the other instance so you can play together. You can always transfer back and forth between them voluntarily through the interface on your minimap. So no, lower pop is not better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stradoo Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 No, because if everybody then decided to resub, the server would explode and take out the entire east coast. Good. Especially if it wipes out Maryland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChaosKirin Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 You know, my concern with this is... If they merge into super-servers, will they raise the character limit per server? 'cuz I play on all PvE and RP servers, and I have more than 8 characters. LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranid Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 You know, my concern with this is... If they merge into super-servers, will they raise the character limit per server? 'cuz I play on all PvE and RP servers, and I have more than 8 characters. LOL. That is also one of my problems. More than the server limit of character spread out over several servers. I also want more characters per server if they are limiting the number of servers by making them super servers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irishdrunk Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 All that was said is that servers will have a higher cap. Speculations arise but nothing more was said. Nothing about forced mergers or transfers. So without any further information this only means (by example): Fatman may currently have an average population of 2000 characters on at a single time from a maximum of 3000. After they increase the cap it would be an average population of 2000 characters on at a single time out of a maximum of 6000. Right, but why would they raise a theoretical cap from 3000 players to 6000 players, on every server, which 90%+ average 100-200 players. They wouldn't increase caps/hardware if they didn't plan to do some sort of merger or reaarangment...especially with everything being voiced lately. Personally I think it would save this game, I don't care what happend to Warhammer, its Warhammer, not Star Wars Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shirvington Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 Super Servers condensed down to 10 servers would be amazing for this game. I am all for it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Styxx Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 You, people and your word games. Don`t forget to come screaming foul play back here, after what you THINK they said, was not actually said, or you were reading too much into it. I have complete faith in your tears and rightfulness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duren_Col Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 This would be awesome. It would definitely help world pvp. If this happens I'm dedicating myself to ganking and my share of griefing some lil sithies (same lvl as me of course or else it wouldnt be fun.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranid Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 You, people and your word games. Don`t forget to come screaming foul play back here, after what you THINK they said, was not actually said, or you were reading too much into it. I have complete faith in your tears and rightfulness. It stands to reason that Bioware likes to copy what others have done. Others have created super servers when they suffered low population. But if it isn't what we think they said, I will admit I am wrong. But it could very well not be what you thought they said also. Will you admit you were wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vis-Tecum Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 Super severs is a code word for server merges. You're not going to get thousands of people on a handful of servers. What you're going to see is about 70 servers just disappear from the server list with your characters assigned to a new "super server". Its a spin tactic meant to distract the media and investors from the fact that this game is merging servers. 100% agreed the remaining population will end up on the same servers we have now with possibly a raised [artificial] player cap it is just PR damage controll because they dont want to admit the decline in players is as wide spread as it is but hey prove me wrong bioware give us some real details and put us haters in our place... PLEASE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dyvid Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 100% agreed the remaining population will end up on the same servers we have now with possibly a raised [artificial] player cap it is just PR damage controll because they dont want to admit the decline in players is as wide spread as it is but hey prove me wrong bioware give us some real details and put us haters in our place... PLEASE Does it really matter what it's called? People are asking for server with high population and that's what BW is giving. As long as the population on all servers become healthy again they can call it what ever they want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chazcon Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 Some dude on a blog posted a comment which was taken out of context. Now its fact after a day or two on the forums. rofl irl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xim-the-Despot Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 (edited) From the May 25th QA: Mallorik: What is your philosophy on cross server LFG tools? Are we getting a same server tool just to hold us over while you work on cross server tech or is this just a test to see if a same server tool will do the job? Daniel: Although we’re certainly willing to entertain the idea of cross-server LFG tools if the need arises, it’s a last resort for us. We firmly believe for cooperative play it is important to have a community and social responsibility that you simply can’t have with players appearing and disappearing from your reality. Instead we are pushing hard on servers that are massive compared to the ones we launched with. Early tests show we’ll be able to raise the peak concurrent user cap above what it was at launch. Combining that with server transfers to enable players to move to these new servers and fill them to the brim, we should see some fantastic, vibrant communities develop where Group Finder will always be able to find someone for your content. Edited May 26, 2012 by Xim-the-Despot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cherly Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 From the May 25th QA: Mallorik: What is your philosophy on cross server LFG tools? Are we getting a same server tool just to hold us over while you work on cross server tech or is this just a test to see if a same server tool will do the job? Daniel: Although we’re certainly willing to entertain the idea of cross-server LFG tools if the need arises, it’s a last resort for us. We firmly believe for cooperative play it is important to have a community and social responsibility that you simply can’t have with players appearing and disappearing from your reality. Instead we are pushing hard on servers that are massive compared to the ones we launched with. Early tests show we’ll be able to raise the peak concurrent user cap above what it was at launch. Combining that with server transfers to enable players to move to these new servers and fill them to the brim, we should see some fantastic, vibrant communities develop where Group Finder will always be able to find someone for your content. translation... we dont want to sink to much money into this sinking game so we will scrub a few servers before we repack them and label them as "super" "realy big" and "full to the brim"... at this point X server will be a waste of dev dollahs as we move into the F2P micro transaction payment model... look forward to us milking every last penny we can form you with no real content/service updated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drudenfusz Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 From the May 25th QA: Mallorik: What is your philosophy on cross server LFG tools? Are we getting a same server tool just to hold us over while you work on cross server tech or is this just a test to see if a same server tool will do the job? Daniel: Although we’re certainly willing to entertain the idea of cross-server LFG tools if the need arises, it’s a last resort for us. We firmly believe for cooperative play it is important to have a community and social responsibility that you simply can’t have with players appearing and disappearing from your reality. Instead we are pushing hard on servers that are massive compared to the ones we launched with. Early tests show we’ll be able to raise the peak concurrent user cap above what it was at launch. Combining that with server transfers to enable players to move to these new servers and fill them to the brim, we should see some fantastic, vibrant communities develop where Group Finder will always be able to find someone for your content. Have seen that in the Q&A too, but now I wonder if that means everyone has to move to these new servers and all the old/current servers will go out of use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vis-Tecum Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 Does it really matter what it's called? People are asking for server with high population and that's what BW is giving. As long as the population on all servers become healthy again they can call it what ever they want. what matters is being talked to like were investors and not a community. it seems to me people are asking for transfers and cross server but what they give us is PR speak we are not investors we dont care about EA market shares we care about the game. tell us whats going on a honest respoinse would sound more like: "sorry we distributed the players over to many servers with artificially low population caps in anticipation of a large player base that would grow over time. we failed to meet those projections and lost many of the current players leaving some servers with very low populations. we will be offering transfers to select servers in a attempt to try and consolidate the population into servers with a high population caps to provide a vibrant community to play with." then they should go on to give details about transfers, server population caps, and goals they want to reach with this server merger. then the players can rage all they want about it on the forums but for once the players will know what to expect for the future of the game. right now I only have fears that they dont have a plan for transfers and it will go extreamly bad. in the end if I lose my guild or legacy because of badly implemented transfers forced on the players with no player feedback I am out of $300 in 2 ce purchases and 6 months of 2 subscriptions because PR and saving face to investores is more important than letting paying customers know what is in the future for tor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts